SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Del) 231

M.K.SHARMA
SUBHASH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.T.ANANTHARAMAN, MUKTA SHARMA

Dr. M. K. Sharma, J.

( 1 ) BY this order I propose to dispose of the application registered as I. A. No. 3055/1996 filed by the defendant under Order 9 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure as also I. A. 3504/1996 filed by the defendant under section 5 of the Limitation Act.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff instituted a suit against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1. 34 lakhs with interest contending inter alia that the aforesaid amount was collected by the defendant from the plaintiff as transfer limit without any authority of law. The defendant contested the suit by filing written statement contending inter alia that such a transfer limit was permissible and legal. In the suit 10 issues were framed by this court and the suit was thereafter listed for trial. On 1/5/1992 statement of Public Witness 1 was recorded in presence of counsel for both the parties. However, on the subsequent date of trial i. e. on 26/7/1993 three witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff were present, but as the counsel for the defendant was not present the trial was adjourned till the next date. However, the counsel for the defendant was also not present on the next date but the court recorded the evidence of th



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top